document resume ed 373 290 cg 025 605 author beckman

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 373 290 CG 025 605

AUTHOR Beckman, Carol M.TITLE Career Maturity of Welfare Recipients.PUB DATE [94]

NOTE 108p.; Master of Science Thesis, Fort Hays StateUniversity.

PUB TYPE Dissertations/Theses Masters Theses (042)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC05 Plus Postage.

DESCRIPTORS Career Choice; Careers; Decision Making; JobSatisfaction; Occupational Aspiration; VocationalInterests; *Vocational Maturity; *WelfareRecipients

IDENTIFIERS Career Maturity Inventory (Crites); Job Opportunitiesand Basic Skills Program

ABSTRACTTo investigate the career maturity of welfare

recipients, this thesis examines six independent variables: (1) race;

(2) sex; (3) age; (4) level of formal education; (5) general

intelligence; and (6) locus of control. Scales taken from the CareerMaturity Inventory served as the dependent variables. The sampleconsisted of 83 welfare recipients who were eligible for the JobOpportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) program in a midwestern state.Of the 100 comparisons that were made, 30 were for main effects and70 were for interactions. Results for the main effects indicate thatindividuals who possess an internal locus of control are more maturein decisiveness and orientation, that females are more mature ininvolvement than males, and that individuals with generalintelligence (91 to 100) are more mature in compromise. As for thesignificant interactions, findings revealed the following positivecorrelations: (1) formal education, general intelligence, and locusof control with Involvement; (2) formal education and age with

Decisiveness; (3) race, sex, and general intelligence withIndependence; and (4) race and sex with Orientation. Five tables andthree figures offer statistical summaries. (RJM)

* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made* from the original document. ;.f

Date

CAREER MATURITY OF WELFARE RECIPIENTS

being

A Thesis Presented to the Graduate Faculty

of the Fort Hays State University in

Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

the Degree of Master of Science

by

Carol M. Beckman

B.S., Fort Hays State University

Approved

Approved

Major Professor

Chair, Graduate Council

Li-1

CD PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY Othce of Educational Research and Improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

7' This document has been reproduced asreceived from Ine person or organaabonoog.nat.ng .1Minor changes have been made to improve,enroduct.on gush!),

C- k /net fri

CNJ

CD

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

Paints of Stew or opinions staled tntrusdocumienl do not necessarily repreSent officalOE RI posthon or sabcy BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Graduate Committee Approval

The Graduate Committee of Carol M. Beckman hereby

approves her thesis as meeting partial fulfillment of the

requirement for the Degree of Master of Science.

Date

Approved

Approved

Approved

Approved

ii

Chair, Graduate Committee

Committee Member

Committee Member

Committee Member

Table of Contents

Introduction

Career Maturity

Page

1

1

Welfare Recipients and Career Maturity 3

Race, Sex, Age, Level of Formal Education and

Career Maturity 8

General Intelligence and Career Maturity 12

Locus of Control and Career Maturity 14

Summary 17

Statement of the Problem 18

Rationale and Importance of the Research 18

Composite Null Hypotheses 20

Independent Variables and Rationale 21

Definitions of Variables 22

Independent Variables 22

Dependent Variables 23

Limitations of the Study 23

Methodology 24

Setting 24

Subjects 24

Instruments 25

General Aptitude Test Battery 25

Rotter's I-E Scale 27

Career Maturity Inventory - Attitude Scale

Counseling Form B-1 27

v

Design 28

Data Collection Procedures 31

Research Procedures 32

Data Analysis 33

Results 34

Discussion 72

Summary 72

Related Literature and the Results of the

Present Study 74

Generalizations 77

Recommendations 78

References 79

vi

J

List of Tables

Page

Table 1: A Comparison of Mean Career Maturity

Inventory - Attitude Scale Counseling

Form B-1 Scores for Welfare Recipients

According to Level of Formal Education,

General Intelligence, and Locus of Control

Employing a Three-Way Analysis of variance 36





General Intelligence, and Age EmployinL; a

Three-Way Analysis of Variance 44


Inventory Attitude Scale Counseling



Locus of Control, and Age Employing a

Three-Way Analysis of Variance 50




According to General Intelligence, Locus of

Control, and Age Employing a Three-Way

Analysis of Variance 58

vii




According to Race, Sex and General Intelligence

Employing a Three-Way Analysis of Variance... 64

viii

List of Figures

Page

Figure 1: The Interaction Between the Independent

Variables General Intelligence and Locus

of Control for the Dependent Variable

Involvement 42


Variables Formal Education and Age for

the Dependent Variable Decisiveness 56


Variables Race and Sex for the Dependent

Variable Orientation 71

ix

Appendix A:

Appendix B:

Appendix C:

Appendix D:

Appendix E:

List of Appendixes

Page

Correlation Coefficients Between Item

and Total Score for the I-E Scale 85

Permission to Utilize Data Generated

from Pre-Orientation Vocational

Assessment Sessions Conducted with

Welfare Recipients Who were Eligible

for the JOBS Program 88

Sample Letter to Subjects 91

Verbal Instructions for Test

Administration 93

Instructions for Administration of the

I-E Scale 96

x

Abstract

The purpose of the researcher was to investigate the

career maturity of welfare recipients. The following six

independent variables were investigated: race, sex, age,

level of formal education, general intelligence, and locus

of control. Dependent variables were scores from the

following five scales of the Career Maturity Inventory

Attitude Scale Counseling Form B-1: Decisiveness,

Involvement, Independence, Orientation, and Compromise. The

sample consisted of 83 welfare recipients who were eligible

for the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) program in

a midwestern state. Five composite null hypotheses were

tested at the .05 level of significance employing a three-

way analysis of variance (general linear model).

A total of 100 comparisons were made plus 75 recurring.

Of the 100 comparisons made, 30 were for main effects and 70

for interactions. Of the 30 main effects, 6 were

statistically significant at the .05 level. Of the 70

interactions, 5 were statistically significant at the .05

level.

The results of the present study appeared to support

the following generalizations:

1. individuals with internal locus of control are more

mature in Decisiveness,


mature in Orientation,

xi

3. females are more mature in Involvement than males,

4. individuals with general intelligence (91 to 100)

are more mature in Orientation,


are more mature in Compromise, and

6. significant interactions for

(a) the independent variables general intelligence

and locus of control for the dependent variable Involvement,

(b) the independent variables formal education,

general intelligence, and locus of control for the dependent

variable Involvement,

(c) the independent variables formal education and

age for the dependent variable Decisiveness,

(d) the independent variables race, sex, and

general intelligence for the dependent variable

Independence, and

(e) the independent "ariables race and sex for the

dependent variable Orientation.

xii

Introduction

Career Maturity

Vocational maturity (career maturity) has been defined

as the level of competence people reach and demonstrate when

dealing with the tasks and problems associated with

vocational development at various life stages (Super &

Overstreet, 1960). Vocational development has become known

as the process through which people make vocational choices

(Super, 1955).

In researching vocational development, Super, et al.

(1957) theorized it as being on a continuum that involved

both growth and learning. Their theory involved five life

stages taken from Charlotte Buehler who wrote about general

development. These five stages were: (1) growth from zero

to age 14; (2) exploration from 14 to 25; (3) establishment

from 25 to 45; (4) maintenance from 45 to anywhere from 55

to 75; and finally, (5) decline, which can start as early as

age 55, but generally begins around age 65 until death.

Super, et al. (1957) stated:

If the individual's behavior develops normally, without

being arrested, then he will progress from -ne stage to

another with increasing age, although his rate of

development, and therefore the age at which he enters

the various stages, may differ from that of other

individuals. (p. 35)

According to Super et al. (1957), vocational behavior

1

2

and development have three major factors. The first is the

roles each person plays. Society places specific sets of

expectancies, or roles, on each of its members. The second

is personal factors. The following are personal factors:

intelligence, special aptitudes, interests, values,

attitudes, and persc -lity. The third is situational

factors which includes anything external to the individual.

The following are examples: socioeconomic status (SES),

atmosphere of the home, societal biases, and familial

attitudes. Thus, vocational development is a process which

takes place on a continuum of time and involves much more

than a single vocational choice at a single point in time.

Crites (1965) stated, "...vocational choice is a

comprehensive, multifaceted, ongoing process which

encompasLes many interrelated behaviors of the individual at

various points in his prework life" (p. 2).

Super (1955) identified five dimensions of vocational

maturity. He reported these dimensions as a basis for

measuring vocational maturity. The dimensions were the

following: (1) Orientation to Vocational Choice, (2)

Information and Planning, (3) Consistency of Vocational

Preference, (4) Crystallization of Traits and Aptitudes, and

(5) Wisdom of Vocational Preference. Crites (1965) proposed

that three of these dimensions could be condensed into two

dimensions which he labeled the following: (1) choice

competencies, and (2) choice attitudes. His theory of

13

3

vocational maturity contained four group factors. Two were

Super's (1955), (1) consistency of vocational choice and

(2) wisdom of vocational choice; and two were his own, (3)

choice competencies, and (4) choice attitudes.

The original concept of vocational maturity (career

maturity) was thought to be applicable only to adolescents

according to Super and Kidd (1979). In more recent years,

researchers have started looking at the career maturity of

adults (Super & Kidd, 1979; and Manuele, 1983). Super et

al. (1957) stated, "In judging the normality of one's

behavior from a statistical point of view, one should be

concerned with what group the individual is being compared.

An individual could be considered normal in one group and

abnormal in another" (p. 56).

Welfare Recipients and Career Maturity

Since 1935, many members of American society have

become part of a special group or population known as

welfare recipients. It was in 1935 that the Aid to Families

with Dependent Children (AFDC) program became part of the

Social Security Act, to provide assistance to widows and

children in need (Nightingale, 1989). This special

population has b'en studied and discussed by many

researchers (Nightingale, 1989; Sklar, 1987; Cull and Hardy,

1973; Randolph & McCarthy, 1991; Rolle, 1977; and Bartlett,

1968) over the years. Various programs have been in place

to aid welfare recipients in gaining needed social services

1 ti

4

and help with job search and training needs. According to

Chisman and Woodworth (1992), the current program, Job

Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS), was part of the

Family Support Act of 1988. The JOBS program was designed

to assist AFDC recipients to become self-sufficient by

providing the necessary employment related activities and

supportive services. Mandatory components were the

following: (1) educational activities (e.g., high school or

equivalent education, basic and/or remedial education, or

English as a Second Language); (2) job skill training; (3)

job readiness activities (e.g., Job Finder's Club, Life

Skills classes); and (4) job development and placement

activities. The program must also include at least two of

the following components: (1) group or individual job

search; (2) on-the-job training; (3) work supplementation

programs; or (4) community work experience programs (Chisman

& Woodworth). Thus, the program was designed not just to

help welfare recipients find jobs, but to increase their

educational levels and enhance their overall lifestyles.

Furstenberg, Brooks-Gunn, and Morgan (1987) made the

following statement:

...there are real life courses characterized by welfare

dependency, non-marriage, low education, and high

fertility. Those whose life course takes such a

trajectory are likely to remain on this path. But if

they can escape, if they can alter this trajectory by

5

getting a stable job, entering a stable marriage,

acquiring educational credentials or curtailing

subsequent fertility, they are no more likely than

others to fall back within this trajectory. Moreover,

children benefit as their mother's life situation

improves. (p. 128)

Randolph and McCarthy (1991) reported individuals who

live in poverty have a low self esteem. The low self esteem

results from a feeling of powerlessness and failure to

behave in a traditional or "normal" manner based on

society's expectations. Cull and Hardy (1973) described

people living in poverty as having a "stronger orientation

in the present and in short-term perspective rather than in

long-term planning and goals" (p. 121). They have a

"definite feeling of fatalism and the belief in chances;

impulsiveness and general inability to delay immediate

gratification or make definite plans for the future" (p.

121-122). They have a "thinking process that could be

termed much more concrete in character than abstract" (p.

122). They have:

general feelings of inferiority and an acceptance of

authoritarianism; therefore, when an individual who has

lived in a poverty environment during the formative

years of his growth and development becomes disabled,

the reaction is g..._nerally substantially different from

those who have been reared in a middle-class

6

environment. (p. 122)

Another important characteristic of families in poverty

reported by Cull and Hardy (1973) was that they were in

constant crises. Families in poverty were described as

having a constant lack of financial stability, an increased

amount of stress, children getting into trouble, the lack of

or loss of employment, and insufficient nutrition and health

care. Cull and Hardy stated, "These constant crises have

the effect of draining all energy from the family and its

members. Such emotionality takes a high toll in terms or

overall ability of a family unit or of an individual" (p.

123).

Sklar (1987) pointed out "that between 25 and 75

percent of all long term recipients, who can be classified

as employable, are functionally illiterate and lack

essential job skills required by employers" (p. 14).

Because so many recipients were found to be functionally

illiterate and to lack essential job skills, the Family

Support Act of 1988 JOBS program focused not only on work

requirements, but also on educational needs which included

gaining a high school diploma or its equivalent, basic

remedial education, vocational education, and in some cases,

post-secondary education (Nightingale, 1989).

Rolle (1977) studied the effectiveness of several

delivery systems for occupational information to minority

college students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. All

7

226 of his subjects were low-achieving in high school with

academic records and Scholastic Aptitude Test scores showing

little or no learning potential. The subjects were Black

college freshmen enrolled at two predominantly Black

colleges in the south. He used a posttest-only control

group design. The treatment consisted of three occupational

information delivery systems. The systems were described as

the following: (1) career logs - records of experiences,

perceptions, and reactions to occupational information; (2)

career simulations - job related experiences similar to real

life; and (3) written occupational briefs - occupational

briefs written by subjects in areas of their vocational

interest. By using treatment and control groups, he was

able to establish through an analysis of variance at the .05

level of confidence that "career planning experiences and

occupational explorations can be beneficial in raising

career maturity of individuals from disadvantaged/minority

groups" (p. 15).

Bartlett (1968) measured the vocational maturity and

personality variables of trainees participating in the

Manpower Development Training Act, a program designed to

train and retrain the unemployed. The sample consisted of

81 female and 69 male subjects ranging in age from 16 to 21.

He utilized the Vocational Development Inventory [(VDI),

Crites, 1965]; and through the use of a one-way analysis of

variance, he found that those trainees who scored higher on

1 Ls

8

the VDI also scored higher on the following personality

variables: self confidence (F= 5.20, p.01), achievement

(F=3.88, R<.01), dominance (F=3.68, p.05), and autonomy

(F=6.03, R<.01). He also found that those with a higher

educational attainment also had a high vocational maturity

score (F=11.21, p<.01). He concluded that the development

of vocational behavior was related to the development of

mature personality characteristics; and vocational

counselors should attempt to facilitate more mature

personality characteristics in their counselees.

Race, Sex, Acre, Level of Formal Education and Career

Maturity

Holland (1981) used a multiple regression analysis to

determine the relationships between career maturity and

socioeconomic status (SES), race, sex and age in 6th grade

students. For a randomly selected sample of 300 students

from 22 public schools in Georgia, Holland found SES to be

the best predictor of career attitudes (r=.40, 2<.01). The

higher the SES, the higher the score on the Career Maturity

Inventory - Attitude Scale (CMI-AS). Even though a

significant difference (F=43.96, R<.001) was found between

the mean scores of White and Black subjects on the CMI-AS,

the author maintained race wFs not an adequate predictor of

career attitudes. When race was paired with SES, a

significant multiple correlation coefficient was found

(F=37.24, R=.45, p<.05). More specifically, White students

9

from upper class backgrounds were found to be more career

mature, and Black and White students at lower and middle SES

had similar career mature attitudes. She did not find sex

and age to be significant predictors of career mature

attitudes for this adolescent group.

Luzzo (1991) studied the career maturity of 401

undergraduate college students from California State

University, Long Beach, in relation to SES and ethnic group.

Through a one-way analysis of variance, the researcher found

Caucasian-Americans (M=37.97) to be significantly more

career mature than Filipino (M=33.54) and Asian-American

(M=35.76) students (F=7.298, p<.001). No significant

difference was found for SES. He concluded that current

theories of career development and career counseling need to

be more Applicable to today's ethnically diverse

populations.

Lawrence and Brown (1976) used a multiple regression

analysis to gain a better understanding of the relationship

of many factors including self concept, SES, race and sex to

career maturity as measured by the CMI - Attitude Scale and

Competence Test. Their 226 subjects were 12th grade

students ranging in age from 16 to 19. For the total group,

self concept (r=.59) and race (r=.62) were found to be

significant predictors of career maturity at the .01 level.

They found White students to be more career mature (for

Black males vs. White males, t=-5.86, R<.01; and for Black

10

females vs. White females, t=-6.66, p<.01 on the CMI-AS).

No significant differences were found between males and

females.

McNair and Brown (1983) and Lee (1984) found similar

results in their studies. The authors of these studies

investigated ethnic and sex differences in 10th grade

students. Multiple regression analysis in both studies

confirmed that White students scored higher than non-White

students (McNair & Brown, F=29.08, p<.01; Lee, F=37.30,

p<.01). Lee (1984) did not find a significant F value for

males and females; however, McNair and Brown (1983) did find

females scored significantly higher than males on career

maturity (F=4.31, p<.05). Lawrence and Brown (1976), McNair

and Brown (1983), and Lee (1984) all suggested that career

counselors must be more aware of the diverse ethnic

populations with which they work.

Herr and Enderlein (1976) examined the differences in

mean scores on the CMI among 9th, 10th and 12th grade

students and between males and females. Their sample

consisted of 1,553 students from three large nonmetropolitan

schools in Pennsylvania. Through the use of a 3 X 3

analysis of variance with grade level and school being the

factors, the researchers found career maturity did increase

incrementally by grade level (F=46.31, p<.001;, but not

without other influences such as school effects, curriculum

choices, and sex differences. The researchers conducted a 2

11

X 3 analysis of variance with sex and grade as the factors,

and found females displayed more career maturity than males

at all grade levels (F=51.39, p<.001).

Healy, O'Shea, and Crook (1985) investigated the

relation of age and career attitudes in 158 students from a

metropolitan California state university. This college only

admitted students who ranked in the upper 50th percentile of

their high school or who had already achieved an associate

degree. The subjects' ages ranged from 18 to 30. They

found a positive correlation coefficient (r=.48, p<.01)

between career attitudes and age. They also found career

attitudes correlated with grade point average (r=.41,

p<.01).

Gladstone and Trimmer (1985) investigated the

predictors of success for welfare recipients in the Work

Incentive (WIN) program in southern Nevada. This welfare

reform program was designed to place welfare recipients in

training and employment. Gladstone and Trimmer postulated

that there were common elements among welfare recipients who

were successful (completed training or entered employment)

and among those who were not. The sample consisted of 29

volunteer and 27 mandatory participants, all of whom were

female. They had a mean age of 27 and an average education

level of 11.7. Ethnically, 59% were Black, 37% were White,

3% were Hispanic, and 1% Asian. All had requested training

and all needed it. They were all considered "non-job ready"

12

due to a lack of work history or current work skills. The

researchers did not find school grade completion a good

predictor because often times, even high school graduates

were found to need adult basic education. They found the

average grade level completed was 11.7; however, the average

literacy level as measured by the Basic Occupational

Literacy Test (BOLT) was at a 6th grade achievement level.

Gladstone and Trimmer reported the following:

Personality traits such as responsibility, self-esteem,

self-confidence, and independence certainly influence

one's success or failure in training or employment.

...The results of the assessment instruments used in

this study demonstrate that intelligent and

aiscretionary use of testing results in the vocational

counseling process is effective for predicting success

or failure in training or employment. (p. 69)

General Intelligence and Career Maturity

Gladstone and Trimmer (1985) obtained a measure of

general intelligence from their sample. They administered

the General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB) which produced a

"G" score, or a measure of general intelligence. The

researchers reported the "G" score as having five functional

levels with Level 1 being the highest and Level 5 being the

lowest. The levels were not defined by the researchers. A

definite relationship was found between "G" scores and

successful completion of training. Gladstone and Trimmer

7')-

13

reported 100% of the subjects with a "G" score at functional

Level 1 successfully completed training, 80% at Level 2, 71%

at Level 3, 63% at Level 4, and no subjects completed

training when their "G" score was at Level 5. "The average

'G' score of those who completed training was 107; and the

average for those who did not complete was 89" (p. 64). The

authors concluded the "G" score on the GATB can be utilized

in predicting success of welfare recipients in training and

employment. They stated "personality traits such as

responsibility, self esteem, self confidence, and

independence certainly influence one's success or failure in

training or employment" (p. 69).

Lawrence and Brown (1976) investigated intelligence as

a predictor of career maturity. They found intelligence, ,Jr

general aptitude, to be correlated with career maturity

(r=.56, p<.01). They stated, "one should not be surprised

to find that the less career mature may be less

intellectually bright" (p. 50). Conclusions from Lawrence

and Brown indicated separate equations should be utilized

with different predictors, such as SES and self concept,

depending on sex and race; and intelligence, race and sex

had a greater effect on career maturity than SES and self

concept. They stated "career maturity as measured by the

CMI is highly correlated with intelligence test scores"

(p. 51).

Palmo and Lutz (1983) studied the performance of

14

disadvantaged youth on the CMI and the Wechsler Adult

Intelligence Scale (WAIS). The sample consisted of 91 high

school dropouts and 29 graduates ranging from age 16 to 22.

The researchers found those who scored higher on the WAIS

also scored higher on the CMI (r=.51, R<.01). The

researchers concluded career maturity and general

intelligence were significantly related constructs for

disadvantaged populations.

West (1988) looked at the correlation of career

maturity and higher academic performance. His subjects were

69 college students; 30 were American Indian, 39 were non-

American Indian. Through the use of Pearson product-moment

correlations, West found a positive correlation between

career maturity and higher academic performance for the

total group (r=.3950, R=.030). Through the use of a t-test,

he also found a significant difference between mean career

maturity scores of the Indian and non-Indian groups for the

whole sample (t=2.55, R=.013). The author concluded that

ethnic minority students have significantly lower career

mature attitudes.

Locus of Control and Career Maturity

Rotter (1966) defined locus of control as the degree

to which an individual believes his rewards or

reinforcements are a result of his actions, or of fate, luck

or chance. In other words, an individual who has an

internal locus of control would be more personally, involved

15

in his vocational development and a person with an external

locus of control would be influenced by others or rely on

fate or luck to determine his life course.

Stebbing (1985) studied the effects of locus of control

on the career maturity of 61 undergraduate junior and senior

women from a large southwestern university. Through

regression and correlation analyses, she found locus of

control to be a valid predictor of career maturity (r=-.31,

R<.002).

Khan and Alvi (1983), Lokan, Boss, and Patsula (1982),

and Thomas and Carpenter (19-) all investigated locus of

control in relation to career' maturity in high school age

students. Even though different instruments were used in

each of the research projects, the researchers reached the

same conclusions. Individuals with an internal locus of

control will generally have a higher level of career

maturity.

Gable, Thompson, and Glanstein (1976) also studied

locus of control and career maturity. Their sample

consisted of 179 volunteer freshmen through senior level

female college students from a New England university.

Through an analysis of variance, the researchers found women

who were more internally controlled were also more career

mature (F=32.7, R<.01).

Amster and Lazarus (1982) studied the locus of control

of disadvantaged high school dropouts after conducting a

16

comprehensive review of the literature regarding the locus

of control of disadvantaged groups. Their review of the

literature did not produce much information about the

subject, and so, the authors conducted their study to obtain

data that could be considered normative. They administered

Rotter's I-E Scale to 197 disadvantaged high school dropouts

ranging in age from 16 to 21. The group had a mean I-E

score 9.95 (SD=3.1) with a range from 2 to 19. Females in

the group were slightly more external (M=10.37, SD=3.05)

than males (M=9.53, SD=3.14). The findings indicated no

statistically significant difference for I-E mean scores for

females and males (p<.09), but were consistent with the

literature regarding the I-E Scale from Rotter (1966).

Rodriguez and Blocher (1988) compared two methods of

increasing career maturity in Puerto Rican college women.

They hypothesized that the career maturity of students

participating in the "modified Adkins Career Choice Modular

Program" would be higher and their locus of control more

internal than that of students who participated in an

alternative career program or a control group. Their

investigation was for a sample of 66 Puerto Rican college

freshmen women who were academically and economically

disadvantaged. Through the use of a multivariate analysis

of covariance the researchers found a significant main

effect for treatment at p=.008. In other words, traditional

career development interventions produced increases in

27

17

career mature attitudes, and changes in locus of control

also resulted from these interventions. According to

Rodriguez and Blocher, "As people come to believe that they

can control their environments and their own future, career

attitudes may also become more mature" (p. 279).

Summary

The review of the literature assembled here covers

three major areas: (1) an overall view of career maturity;

(2) a description of welfare recipients and the welfare

reform program currently in existence; and (3) studies of

the various predictors of career maturity in different

populations related to race, sex, age, level of formal

education, general intelligence, and locus of control. Just

a few of these studies were similar in nature to the present

study. Bartlett (1968) studied the career maturity of

manpower trainees. His subjects ranged in age from 16 to

21, and were part of a low-income group, but were not

necessarily welfare recipients. Gable, Thompson, and

Glanstein (1976) researched the career maturity of women,

but limited their study to college freshmen through seniors.

Rodriguez and Blocher's (1988) study looked at the career

maturity of an economically disadvantaged group of women,

but again, the group was enrolled in college. Gladstone and

Trimmer (1985) looked at the predictors of success for

welfare recipients involved in a welfare program; however,

they did not look specifically at the career maturity of

18

welfare recipients. Most previous research of career

maturity has been conducted on adolescents or college-age

groups. Overall, the results of the studies reviewed

indicated an internal locus of control and a higher general

intelligence to be consistent predictors of career maturity

regardless of race, sex, age, or level of formal education.

In terms of race, sex, age, and level of formal education,

the results are less conclusive.

In recent years, welfare reform has been a major topic

of discussion within the nation. Many authors of the

studies cited in this literature review offered the

following suggestions for career development programs: (1)

counselors need to be more aware of the diverse cultural

populations with which they work, (2) counselors need to

encourage autonomy and assertiveness in their counselees in

order to bring about a more internal locus of control, and

(3) individuals from low socioeconomic backgrounds can

increase their vocational maturity by receiving occupational

information through career planning experiences.

Statement of the Problem


career maturity of welfare recipients.

Rationale and Importance of the Research

The author of the present study researched the special

population of welfare recipients with whom many counselors,

social workers, and sometimes educational personnel find

19

themselves working. It is essential for these professionals

to have knowledge of techniques and programs that work for

welfare recipients and which ones do not. Vocational

counselors may need to develop career development programs

for welfare recipients. With the results of this study,

they can increase their knowledge base from which to build

the foundation of such a program.

The current literature available offered little

substantial knowledge specifically about career maturity and

welfare recipients. The author of the present study

incorporated the population of welfare recipients into the

already existing body of knowledge regarding career

maturity. The author also attempted to clarify race, sex,

age, level of formal education, and career maturity for this

special population.

Results of the present study may be used by legislators

who work on the problem of welfare reform. The factors

identified with career maturity in welfare recipients can

then be emphasized in future programs. Vocational

counselors, social workers, and educational personnel who

work in welfare programs, may also find the results of this

study helpful. The professionals in the human service field

will be able to address specific issues found to be relevant

in working with welfare recipients. The following are

examples: promoting more internal locus of control and

remedial education programs that include enhancements to

I,

20

develop more mature career attitudes.

The results of the present study provided information

pertaining to the following questions:

1. Is there an association between welfare recipients'

race and career maturity?


sex and career maturity?


age and career maturity?


level of formal education and career maturity?


general intelligence and career maturity?


locus of control and career maturity?

Composite Null Hypotheses

Each hypothesis was tested at the .05 level of

significance.

1. The differences among the mean Career Maturity

Inventory - Attitude Scale Counseling Form B-1 scores

according to level of formal education, general

intelligence, and locus of control will not be statistically

significant.




21

intelligence, and age will not be statistically significant.



according to level of formal education, locus of control,

and age will not be statistically significant.

4. The differences among the Maturity


according to general intelligence, locus of control, and age

will not be statistically significant.



according to race, sex, and general intelligence will not be

statistically significant.

Independent Variables and Rationale

The six independent variables investigated were: (1)

race, (2) sex, (3) age, (4) level of formal education, (5)

general intelligence, and (6) locus of control. The

rationale for the selection of these variables was: (a) no

studies were located which dealt specifically with the

career maturity of welfare recipients (most of the research

regarding career maturity utilized adolescents and college

students), (b) many of the studies found were not current,

and (c) from the studies reviewed, few were conclusive in

determining the effects of race, sex, age, and level of

formal education on career maturity.

22

Definitions of Variables

Independent Variables

The information for the first four independent

variables was self reported on the answer sheet for the

General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB). Of the remaining two,

general intelligence was measured by the GATB; and locus of

control was self reported on Rotter's I-E Scale. The

following variables were investigated:

1. race - 3 levels (determined post hoc),

level one, White,

level two, Black, and

level three, Hispanic;

2. sex - 2 levels,

level one, male, and

level two, female;

3. age - 3 levels, (determined post hoc),

level one, age 18 to 24,

level two, age 25 to 31, and

level three, age 32 to 48;

4. level of formal education - 3 levels (determined

post hoc),

level one, less than high school diploma,

level two, high school diploma or GED, and

level three, more than high school diploma;

5. general intelligence - 4 levels (determined post

hoc),

) '3

23

level one, G = 80 or below,

level two, G = 81 to 90,

level three, G = 91 to 100, and

level four, G = 101 to 120; and

6. locus of control - 2 levels,

level one, internal - 0 to 10, and

level two, external - 11 to 23.

Dependent Variables

Scores from the following five scales of the Career

Maturity Inventory - Attitude Scale Counseling Form B-1 were

employed as the dependent variables (five items on the first

four scales and eight on the fifth scale were experimental

and not used in scoring):

1. Decisiveness - 15 items, possible scores are 0-10;

2. Involvement - 15 items, possible scores are 0-10;

3. Independence - 15 items, possible scores are 0-10;

4. Orientation - 15 items, possible scores are 0-10;

and

5. Compromise - 15 items, possible scores are 0-7.

Limitations of the Study

The following conditions might have affected the

results of the present study:

1. the sample was not random;

2. the subjects came from one geographical area;

3. tt: study was limited to subjects from a single

time interval;

4. most of the information was self reported; and

5. sample size.

Methodology

24

Setting

This study was conducted on welfare recipients who were

determined to be eligible for the Job Opportunity and Basic

Skills (JOBS) program in a midwestern state. The

geographical location included one major city with a

population of approximately 310,000, and several smaller

communities. The economic base of the area was supported

mainly by manufacturing; service (e.g., health care);

wholesale and retail trade; transportation, communication

and public utilities; finance, insurance and real estate;

and construction. In November of 1993, the area had an

unemployment rate of 5.9% which was higher than the previous

year when it was at 4.6% (Kansas Department of Human

ResourcesF December, 1993). This was due to massive layoffs

in 1993 at ol :a of the major aircraft manufacturing plants.

Subjects

The subjects were selected based on their eligibility

for the JOBS program. To be eligible for the JOBS program,

one must be receiving AFDC (i.e., cash assistance) from the

State Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services

(SRS). The subjects were identified by their JOBS program

casemanagers, and then notified by the casemanagers to

report to the researcher's office for a pre-orientation

25

vocational assessment. Child care assistance and a

transportation allowance was made available to those

subjects who requested it from the SRS JOBS program. The

sample consisted of 83 welfare recipients; 59 females, 24

males; and 64% were White, 30% were Black, and 6% were

Hispanic. The subjects ranged in age from 18 to 48.

Instruments

Three instruments were used. The answer sheet from the

General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB) was used to obtain

information regarding race, sex, age, and level of formal

education. The GATB was used to gain a measure of general

intelligence. The Rotter I-E Scale was used to obtain a

measure of a generalized locus of control. The Career

Maturity Inventory - Attitude Scale Counseling Form B-1 was

used as a measure of career maturity.

General Aptitude Test Battery. The General Aptitude

Test Battery (GATB) was used to measure general

intelligence. This instrument was developed by the United

States Employment Service (USES) and has been used by state

employment offices since 1947. It was normed on a sample

that consisted of 4000.people representative of the working

population of the 1940s which was oriented toward blue-

collar jobs. The GATB measures 9 aptitudes. They are the

following: general intelligence (G), verbal (V), numerical

(N), spatial perception (S), clerical perception (Q), form

perception (P), motor coordination (K), finger dexterity

26

(F), and manual dexterity (M).

The "G" score is the measure of general intelligence,

or general learning ability. It is defined as the ability

to reason and make judgements, and is essentially a measure

of overall academic ability. It is a combination score

obtained from three tests: the spatial perception, verbal

ability, and arithmetic reasoning tests. The mean for the

"G" score is 100 with a standard deviation of 20. The "G"

score correlates highly with both the "V" (r=.84) and the

"N" (r=.86) scores (no p value was reported). The "G" score

may be used as a guideline in predicting success in

training. A minimum "G" score of 100 may predict success

for junior college; 110 for a four-year college; and 120 for

graduate or professional school (U.S. Department of Labor,

Manpower Administration, 1979).

The General Aptitude Test Battery is a widely known and

used multiple aptitude battery and has been well established

with numerous studies of validity and reliability. One

study, conducted in 1954 by the Pennsylvania Agency, had a

sample which consisted of 95 males and 85 females. Subjects

were initially tested on Form A of the GATB, and then

retested on Form B one week later. The correlation

coefficient for the "G" score was reported at r=.92 for

males, and r=.90 for females. Another study was conducted

between 1956 and 1958 and included data from five states.

The total sample consisted of 168 males and 155 females.

27

Individuals were initially tested on Form B of the GATB, and

then retested on the same form two weeks later. The

correlation coefficient reported for the "G" score was r=.94

for both males and females (U.S. Department of Labor,

Manpower Administration, 1979).

Rotter's I-E Scale. Rotter's I-E scale was used to

measure the construct of locus of control. This scale was

devised by Rotter (1966), and, according to Stebbing (1985),

is one of the most widely used instruments for measuring a

person's internal or external orientation. The I-E scale is

a forced-choice, 29-item, self-report instrument. The 29

items include 6 filler statements to make the purpose of the

test remain somewhat unclear to the test taker. The score

is reported in terms of the total number of external choices

and can range from 0 to 23. Therefore, a low score

indicates a more internal locus of control, and a high score

signifies a more external orientation. The scale's internal

consistency has been determined by a Kuder-Richardson

reliability coefficient of r=.73; and its test-retest

reliability coefficient for one month has been reported at

r=.72 (Rotter, 1966).

Rotter (1966) reported correlation coefficients between

each item of the instrument and total score. These values

were cited in Appendix A.

Career Maturity Inventory - Attitude Scale Counseling

Form B-1. The Career Maturity Inventory - Attitude Scale

28

Counseling Form B-1 was used to measure career maturity.

This instrument was constructed by Crites (1978a) and,

according to Palma and Lutz (1983), is one of the most

widely used measures of career maturity. Form B-1 of the

attitude scale consists of 75 true-false items, 50 of which

are from the original Form A-1, and 25 are new items. Form

B-1 consists of the following five scales: Decisiveness,

Involvement, Independence, Orientation, and Compromise.

Possible scores on each of the scales is 0 to 10, except on

the Compromise scale. Possible scores are 0 to 7 for the

Compromise scale. It takes about 20 minutes to administer

Form B-1 of the Career Maturity Inventory - Attitude Scale.

This instrument was designed to elicit "the feelings, the

subjective reactions, the dispositions that the individual

has toward making a career choice and entering the world of

work" (Crites, 1978a, p. 3). Crites (1978b) reported Kuder-

Richardson (KR) 20 reliability coefficients which ranged

from .72 to .90. Internal consistency coefficients for the

five sub-scales on Form B-1 were the following:

Decisiveness, r=.67; Involvement, r=.62; Independence,

r==.71; Orientation, r=.72; and Compromise, r=.50 (1978b).

Design

A status survey factorial design was employed. The

independent variables utilized were: (a) race, (b) sex, (c)

age, (d) level of formal education, (e) general

intelligence, and (f) locus of control. The dependent

1

29

variables were scores from the following five scales of the

Career Maturity Inventory - Attitude Scale Counseling Form

B-1: Decisiveness, Involvement, Independence, Orientation,

and Compromise. The sample consisted of 83 subjects; 59

were female, 24 were male.

The following design was used with each composite null

hypothesis:

composite null hypothesis number 1, a 3 X 4 X 2

factorial design;


factorial design;


factorial design;


factorial design; and


factorial design.

McMillan and Schumacher (1984) cited 10 threats to

internal validity. The 10 threats were dealt with in the

following ways:

1. history did not pertain because the present

study was a status survey;

2. selection - all welfare recipients asked to

participate who came and completed instruments were

included;

3. statistical regression - did not pertain because

30

the present study was a status survey;

4. testing - did not pertain because the present


5. instrumentation - did not pertain because the

present study was a status survey;

6. mortality - did not pertain because the present


7. maturation - did not pertain because the present


8. diffusion of treatment - did not pertain because

the present study was a status survey;

9. experimenter bias - the same oral instructions

were given by the researcher to all groups during the

administration of the instruments and no treatment was

administered; and

10. statistical conclusion - two mathematical

assumptions were violated (random sample and equal numbers

of subjects in cells). The general linear model was used to

correct for unequal numbers of subjects in cells, and the

researcher did not project beyond the statistical procedures

employed.

McMillan and Schumacher (1984) cited 2 threats to

external validity. The 2 threats were dealt with in the

following ways:

1. population external validity - the sample was not

random; theref-re, the results should be generalized only to

31

groups similar to the sample; and

2. ecological external validity - the data were

collected by standard procedures and there was no treatment.

Data Collection Procedures

The researcher contacted the director of the Employment

Preparation Services (EPS), which administers the Job

Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) program, to request

permission to use data from pre-orientation vocational

assessment sessions conducted with welfare recipients who

were determined to be eligible for the JOBS program

(Appendix B). The names of those welfare recipients who

were determined eligible for the JOBS program were placed on

schedules for the pre-orientation vocational assessment

sessions by their JOBS program casemanager. The recipients

whose names were on the schedules were notified by their SRS

casemanagers to report to the researcher's office on a

specified date and time (Appendix C).

The researcher administered the instruments in the same

order to each of the groups of recipients (Appendix D). The

size of the groups varied from 3 to 10 subjects. The

subjects were informed at a later time that parts of the

assessment were used for research purposes. The researcher

collected the answer sheets for each of the assessments, and

then the answer sheets for the GATB were mailed to the State

Department of Human Resources for machine scoring. When the

scored aptitude tests had been returned to the researcher,

4;

32

all data were assembled, necessary coding was made, and the

data were sent to the Fort State University Computer Center

for data analysis.

Research Procedures

The following steps were implemented in the present

study:

1. a research topic was selected;

2. related literature was obtained through data base

searches (i.e., ERIC, PSYCHLIT, Social Science Index, and

Thesis Abstracts from Ablah Library at The Wichita State

University, Wichita, Kansas);

3. resources were reviewed;

4. instruments were selected;

5. permission was obtained from the Department of

Social and Rehabilitation Services to utilize data generated

from pre-orientation vocational assessment sessions

conducted with welfare recipients in the JOBS program;

6. the Career Maturity Inventory - Attitude Scale

Counseling Form B-1 was obtained from Chronical Guidance

Publishers in Moravia, NY.

7. research proposal was written;

8. proposal was defended before the thesis. committee;

9. data were collected;

10. data were analyzed;

11. final document was written;

12. completed document was defended before the thesis

33

committee; and

13. final editing of the thesis.

Data Analysis

The following were compiled:

1. appropriate descriptive statistics;

2. three-way analysis of variance (general linear

model);

3. Bonferroni (Dunn) t test for means; and

4. Duncan's multiple-range test for means.

4 4

34

Results


career maturity of welfare recipients. The following



of control. The dependent variables were scores from the

following five scales of the Career Maturity Inventory







way analysis of variance (general linear model). A status

survey factorial design was employed. The following design

was used with each composite null hypothesis:


factorial design;


factorial design;


factorial design;


factorial design; and


factorial design.

35

The results section was organized according to

composite null hypotheses for ease of reference.

Information pertaining to each composite null hypothesis was

presented in a common format for ease of comparison.

It was hypothesized in composite null hypothesis number

1 that the differences among the mean Career Maturity



intelligence, and locus of control would not be

statistically significant. Information pertaining to

composite null hypothesis number 1 was presented in Table 1.

The following were cited in Table 1: variables, group

sizes, means, standard deviations, F values, and p levels.

36

Table 1: A Comparison of Mean Career Maturity Inventory

Attitude Scale Counseling Form B-1 Scores for Welfare

Recipients According to Level of Formal Education, General

Intelligence, and Locus of Control Employing a Three-Way

Analysis of Variance

Variable n M*

S F value p level

Formal Education (A)

< H.S. diploma

H.S. diploma/GED

> H.S. diploma

General Intelligence (B)

80 or below

81 to 90

91 to 100

101 to 120

Locus of Control (C)

Internal

External

**Decisiveness

38 5.2 2.02

35 5.0 2.15 0.23 .7984

10 5.6 2.67

16 4.8 1.88

24 4.8 2.40

26 5.6 2.06

17 5.4 2.15

40 5.8 2.18

43 4.6 1.96

Interactions

A X B

A X C

B X C

AXBXC(continued)

4i

1.52 .2169

0.77 .3848

1.59 .1770

2.14 .1260

1.62 .1941

0.91 .4662

Table 1 (continued)

37

Variable n M S F value p level

Involvement


38 8.1 1.73< H.S. diploma

H.S. diploma/GED 35 8.6 1.70 0.90 .4131

> H.S. diploma 10 8.6 1.51


80 or below 16 7.3 2.47

81 to 90 24 8.3 1.431.42 .2450

91 to 100 26 6.7 1.26

101 to 120 17 9.1 1.27


Internal 40 8.8 1.323.76 .0571

External 43 8.1 1.93

Interactions

A X B 1.21 .3158

A X C 0.61 .5476

B X C 3.28 .0266

A X B X C 2.80 .0334

(continued)

4 3

38

Table 1 (continued)

Variable n M S 17. value p level

Independence


38 8.8 1.69< H.S. diploma

H.S. diploma/GED 35 8.7 1.38 0.33 .7182

> H.S. diploma 10 8.9 0.99


80 or below 16 8.4 1.63

81 to 90 24 9.2 1.371.07 .3684

91 to 100 26 8.7 1.61

101 to 120 17 8.8 1.25


Internal 40 9.0 1.312.37 .1285


Interactions

A X B 0.54 .7461

A X C 0.07 .9344

B X C 2.44 .0727

AXBXC 0.88 .4803

(continued)

4 a

Table 1 (continued)

39


Orientation


38 6.2 2.31< H.S. diploma

H.S. diploma/GED 35 6.7 2.17 0.45 .6408

> H.S. diploma 10 7.3 2.45


80 or below 16 5.6 2.58

81 to 90 24 6.6 1.810.82 .4904

91 to 100 26 7.0 2.51

101 to 120 17 6.6 2.06


Internal 40 7.1 2.262.86 .0957


Interactions

A X B 1.66 .1573

A X C 0.40 .6690

B X C 1.32 .2763

AXBXC 0.70 .5959

(continued)

,) 0

Table 1 (continued)

40


Compromise


38 4.9 1.54< H.S. diploma

H.S. diploma/GED 35 5.0 1.20 0.05 .9547

> H.S. diploma 10 5.3 1.83

General Intelligence (R)

80 or below 16 4.4 1.50

81 to 90 24 4.8 1.691.22 .3115

91 to 100 26 5.4 1.14

101 to 120 17 5.2 1.24


Internal 40 5.3 1.330.15 .7019


Interactions

A X B 0.84 .5250

A X C 1.86 .1648

B X C 0.80 .4994

AXBXC 0.62 .6498

* The larger the value, the greater the career maturity.** Possible scores: Decisiveness (0-10), Involvement (0-10),Independence (0-10), Orientation (0-10), and Compromise (0-7).

:5 4_

41

Two of the 35 p values were statistically significant

at the .05 level; therefore, the null hypotheses for these

comparisons were rejected. The statistically significant

comparisons were for interactions. The following

interactions were statistically significant:

1. the independent variables general intelligence and

locus of control for the dependent variable Involvement, and

2. the independent variables formal education, general

intelligence, and locus of control for the dependent

variable Involvement.

The interaction between the independent variables

general intelligence and locus of control for the dependent

variable Involvement was depicted in a profile plot. Figure

1 contains mean Involvement scores and curves for locus of

control.

5 2

42

Figure 1: The Interaction Between the Independent Variables

General Intelligence and Locus of Control for the Dependent

Variable Involvement

9.5

09.0

0

8.500

a) 8.0>r4

7.5

H7.0

al

6.5

(4)

(13)

80 or below 81 to 90

Locus of ControlInternalExternal-

(6)

I

91 to 100 101 to 120

General Intelligence


general intelligence and locus of control for the dependent

variable Involvement was disordinal. The results cited in

Figure 1 indicated the following:

1. individuals with internal locus of control and

general intelligence of 101 to 120 had numerically the

largest mean Involvement scores of any subgroup, and

2. individuals with external locus of control and

general intelligence of 80 or below had numerically the

43

smallest mean Involvement scores of any subgroup.

The interaction among the independent variables formal

education, general intelligence, and locus -4* control for

the dependent variable Involvement was not depicted in a

profile plot. The interaction was not presented in a figure

due to the sample size and the nature of the data.





intelligence, and age would not be statistically

significant. Information pertaining to composite null

hypothesis number 2 was presented in Table 2. The following

were cited in Table 2: variables, group sizes, means,

standard deviations, F values, and R levels.

44



Recipients According to Level of Formal Education, General

Intelligence, and Age Employing a Three-Way Analysis of

Variance

Variable F value R level

Decisiveness**


(B)

38 5.2 2.02

35 5.0 2.15

10 5.6 2.67

0.17 .8407

< H.S. diploma

H.S. diploma/GED

> H.S. diploma


80 or below 16 4.8 1.88

81 to 90 24 4.8 2.400.27 .8501

91 to 100 26 5.6 2.06

101 to 120 17 5.4 2.15

Age (D)

33 4.8 2.1718 to 24

25 to 31 32 5.2 2.24 0.36 .7014

32 to 48 18 5.7 1.87

Interactions

A X B 0.65 .6624

A X D 1.94 .1178

B X D 1.06 .3985

AXBXD 0.55 .7666

(continued)

45

Table 2 (continued)

Variable F value p level

Involvement


(B)

38 8.1 1.73

35 8.6 1.70

10 8.6 1.51

0.85 .4348

< H.S. diploma

H.S. diploma/GED

> H.S. diploma


80 or below 16 7.3 2.47

81 to 90 24 8.3 1.431.28 2901

91 to 100 26 8.7 1.26

101 to 120 17 9.1 1.27

Age (D)

33 8.4 1.7618 to 24

25 to 31 32 8.4 1.44 0.95 .3941

32 to 48 18 8.4 2.03

Interactions

A X B 0.17 .9720

A X D 1.15 .3410

B X D 0.14 .9905

AXBXD 1.38 .2378

(continued)

1

46

Table 2 (continued)


Independence


< H.S. diploma 38 8.8 1.69

H.S. diploma/GED 35 8.7 1.38 0.07 .9316

> H.S. diploma 10 8.9 0.99


80 or below 16 8.4 1.63

81 to 90 24 9.2 1.370.72 .5467

91 to 100 26 8.7 1.61

101 to 120 17 8.8 1.25

Age (D)

18 to 24 33 8.9 1.54

25 to 31 32 8.8 1.52 0.42 .6594

32 to 48 18 8.7 1.36

Interactions

A X B 0.27 .9259

A X D 0.28 .8916

B X D 0.60 .7266

AXBXD 0.74 .6171

(continued)

7

47

Table 2 (continued)


Orientation


38 6.2 2.31< H.S. diploma

H.S. diploma 35 6.7 2.17 0.32 .7305

> H.S. diploma 10 7.3 2.45


80 or below 16 5.6 2.58

81 to 90 24 6.6 1.811.55 .2124

91 to 100 26 7.0 2.51

101 to 120 17 6.6 2.06

Age (D)

33 6.2 2.3318 to 24

25 to 31 32 6.8 2.13 0.09 .9120

32 to 48 18 6.9 2.39

Interactions

A X B 1.79 .1302

A X D 1.60 .1872

B X D 0.90 .4994

AXBXD 1.15 .3488

(continued)

Table 2 (continued)

48


Compromise


38 4.9 1.54< H.S. diploma

H.S. diploma/GED 35 5.0 1.20 0.02 .9818

> H.S. diploma 10 5.3 1.83


80 or below 16 4.4 1.50

81 to 90 24 4.8 1.691.10 .3560

91 to 100 26 5.4 1.14

101 to 120 17 5.2 1.24

Age (D)

33 4.9 1.3518 to 24

25 to 31 32 5.1 1.50 0.25 .7809

31 to 48 18 4.9 1.51

Interactions

A X B 0.50 .7747

A X D 0.84 .5066

B X D 0.32 .9254

AXBXD 0.30 .9343


5J

49

None of the 35 p values were statistically significant


comparisons were retained. The results cited in Table 2

indicated no associations between independent and dependent

variables.




according to level of formal education, locus of control,

and age would not be statistically significant. Information

pertaining to composite null hypothesis number 3 was

presented in Table 3. The following were cited in Table 3:

variables, group sizes, means, standard deviations, F

values, and p levels.

G0

50



Recipients According to Level of Formal Education, Locus of

Control, and Age Employing a Three-Way Analysis of Variance

Variable n M" S F value p level


< H.S. diploma

H.S. diploma/GED

> H.S. diploma


Internal

External

ARg (D)

18 to 24

25 to 31

32 tc 48

Decisiveness

38 5.2 2.02

35 5.0 2.15 0.56 .5744

10 5.6 2.67

40 5.8 2.181.30 .2591

43 4.6 1.96

33 4.8 2.17

32 5.2 2.24 0.12 .8846

18 5.7 1.87

Interactions

A X C 0.72 .4903

A X D 2.61 .0435

C X D 1.31 .2757

AXCXD 1.11 .3501

(continued)

rt)

51

Table 3 (continued)


Involvement


< H.S. diploma 38 8.1 1.73

H.S. diploma/GED 35 8.6 1.70 0.50 .6077

> H.S. diploma 10 8.6 1.51


Internal 40 8.8 1.321.60 .2110


Agg (D)

18 to 24 33 8.4 1.76

25 to 31 32 8.4 1.44 0.68 .5090

32 to 48 18 8.4 2.03

Interactions

A X C 0.07 .9370

A X D 1.38 .2501

C X D 0.01 .9882

AXCXD 0.40 .7566

(continued)

52

Table 3 (continued)


Independence


< H.S. diploma 38 8.8 1.69

H.S. diploma/GED 35 8.7 1.38 0.08 .9241

> H.S. diploma 10 8.9 0.99


Internal 40 9.0 1.310.21 .6459


Age (D)

18 to 24 33 8.9 1.54

25 to 31 32 8.8 1.52 0.61 .5479

32 to 48 18 8.7 1.36

Interactions

A X C 1.19 .3094

A X D 0.15 .9624

C X D 0.22 .8042

AXCXD 0.96 .4151

(continued)

13

53

Table 3 (continued)


Orientation


< H.S. diploma 38 6.2 2.31

H.S. diploma/GED 35 6.7 2.17 1.97 .1472

> H.S. diploma 10 7.3 2.45


Internal 40 7.1 2.262.04 .1577


Age (D)

33 6.2 2.3318 to 24

25 to 31 32 6.8 2.13 0.32 .7253

32 to 48 18 6.9 2.39

Interactions

A X C 0.40 .6693

A X D 1.21 .3144

C X D 0.66 .5180

AXCXD 0.12 .9484

(continued)

4

54

Table 3 (continued)



< H.S. diploma

H.S. diploma/GED

> H.S. diploma


Internal

External

Age (D)

18 to 24

25 to 31

32 to 48

Compromise

38 4.9 1.54

35 5.0 1.20 0.55 .5811

10 5.3 1.83

40 5.3 1.330.17 .6778

43 4.7 1.47

33 4.9 1.35

32 5.1 1.50 0.45 .6372

18 4.9 1.51

Interactions

A X C 1.36 .2625

A X D 1.90 .1202

C X D 0.27 .7632

AXCXD 1.51 .2213


55

One of the 35 p values was statistically significant at

the .05 level; therefore, the null hypothesis for this

comparison was rejected. The statistically significant

comparison was for the interaction between independent

variables formal education and age for the dependent

variable Decisiveness.

The interaction between independent variables formal

education and age for the dependent variable Decisiveness

was depicted in a profile plot. Figure 2 contains mean

Decisiveness scores and curves for age.

56

Figure 2: The Interaction Between the Independent Variable

Formal Education and Age for the Dependent Variable

Decisiveness

Q)

P00U)

6.0

a)

5.5

1-1 5.00a)

04.5

04.0

7.5

7.0

6.5

3.5

3.0

Age,

18 -24-25-31=32 -48=

(14)

(2)

< H.S. Diploma H.S. Diploma/GED > H.S. Diploma

Formal Education


formal education and age for the dependent variable

Decisiveness was disordinal. The results cited in Figure 2

indicated the following:

1. i_lividuals age 18 to 24 with formal education of

G 7

57

more than a high school diploma had numerically the largest

mean Decisiveness score of any subgroup, and

2. individuals age 32 to 48 with formal education of

more than a high school diploma had numerically the smallest

mean Decisiveness score of any subgroup.




according to level of general intelligence, locus of

control, and age would not be statistically significant.

Information pertaining to composite null hypothesis number 4

was presented in Table 4. The following were cited in Table

4: variables, group sizes, means, standard deviations, F

values, and p levels.

13

58



Recipients According to General Intelligence, Locus of

Control, and Age Employing a Three-Way Analysis of Variance

Variable n M *S F value p level

Decisiveness**


80 or below 16 4.8 1.88

81 to 90 24 4.8 2.400.64 .5934

91 to 100 26 5.6 2.06

101 to 120 17 5.4 2.15


Internal 40 5.8 a 2.185.63 .0209

External 43 4.6b

1.96

Age (D)

33 4.8 2.1718 to 24

25 to 31 32 5.2 2.24 0.95 .3939

32 to 48 18 5.7 1.87

Interactions

B X C 0.97 .4128

B X D 1.02 4221C X D 0.76 .4707

BXCXD 0.15 .9796

(continued)

67

59

Table 4 (continued)



80 or below

81 to 90

91 to 100

101 to 120


Internal

External

Age (D)

18 to 24

25 to 31

32 to 48

Involvement

(B)

16

24

7.3 2.47

8.3 1.431.01 .3964

26 8.7 1.26

17 9.1 1.27

40 8.8 2.182.54 .1160

43 8.1 1.96

33 8.4 1.76

32 8.4 1.44 0.31 .7347

18 8.4 2.03

Interactions

B X C 2.37 .0796

B X D 0.39 .8804

C X D 0.66 .5202

BXCXD 0.39 .8570

(continued)

7

60

Table 4 (continued)


Independence


80 or below 16 8.4 1.63

81 to 90 24 9.2 1.370.69 .5628

91 to 100 26 8.7 1.61

101 to 120 17 8.8 1.25


Internal 40 9.0 1.311.84 .1800


Age (D)

33 8.9 1.5418 to 24

25 to 31 32 8.8 1.52 0.78 .4618

32 to 48 18 8.7 1.36

Interactions

B X C 2.17 .1009

B X D 0.84 .5411

C X D 0.49 .6162

BXCXD 0.67 .6513

(continued)

7l

Table 4 (continued)

61


Orientation


80 or below 16 5.6 2.58

81 to 90 24 6.6 1.810.85 .4744

91 to 100 26 7.0 2.51

101 to 120 17 6.6 2.06


Internal 40 7.1a 2.266.67 .0122

External 43 6.01) 2.17

Age (D)

33 6.2 2.3318 to 24

25 to 31 32 6.8 2.13 0.71 .4962

32 to 48 18 6.9 2.39

Interactions

B X C 1.23 .3058

B X D 0.95 .4700

C X D 0.70 .4983

BXCXD 0.42 .8314

(continued)

7:2

62

Table 4 (continued)


Compromise


80 or below 16 4.4 1.50

81 to 90 24 4.8 1.691.07 .3667

91 to 100 26 5.4 1.14

101 to 120 17 5.2 1.24


Internal 40 5.3 1.333.47 .0676


Age (D)

33 4.9 1.3518 to 24

25 to 31 32 5.1 1.50 0.14 .8668

32 to 48 18 4.9 1.51

Interactions

B X C 0.32 .8134

B X D 0.35 .9059

C X D 0.48 .6194

BXCXD 0.45 .8143

* The larger the value, the greater the career maturity.** Possible scores: Decisiveness (0-10), Involvement (0-10),Independence (0-10), Orientation (0-10), and Compromise (0-7).ab Difference statistically significant at the .05 level according toBonferroni (Dunn) t test for means.

"i 3

63

Two of the 35 p values were statistically significant


comparisons were rejected. The statistically significant

comparisons were for main effects. The following main

effects were statistically significant:

1. the independent variable locus of control for the

dependent variable Decisiveness, and



The results in Table 4 indicated the following for main

effects:

1. individuals with internal locus of control had a

statistically larger mean Decisiveness score than those with

external locus of control, and


statistically larger mean Orientation score than those with

external locus of control.




according to race, sex, and general intelligence would not

be statistically significant. Information pertaining to

composite null hypothesis number 5 was presented in Table 5.

The following were cited in Table 5: variables, group

sizes, means, standard deviations, F values, and p levels.

71i

64



Recipients According to Race, Sex, and General Intelligence

Employing a Three-Way Analysis of Variance

Variable n M" S F value p level

Decisiveness**

Race (E)

White 53 5.0 2.22

Black 25 5.4 2.08 1.21 .3042

Hispanic 5 5.2 1.79

Sex (F)

Male 24 5.6 2.340.22 .6438

Female 59 5.0 2.05


80 or below 16 4.8 1.88

81 to 90 24 4.8 2.401.51 .2197

91 to 100 26 5.6 2.06

101 to 120 17 5.4 2.15

Interactions

E X F 0.00 .9947

E X B 0.57 .7244

F X B 0.56 .6412

EXFXB 1.08 .3032

(continued)

65

Table 5 (continued)


Involvement

Race (E)

White 53 8.5 1.77

Black 25 8.2 1.55 0.11 .8930

Hispanic 5 7.8 1.48

Sex (F)

Male 24 7.8a

2.019.62 .0028

Female 59 8.7b

2.48


80 or below 16 7.3a 2.47

81 to 90 24 8.3 1.43

b3.59 .0181

91 to 100 26 8.7 1.26

101 to 120 17 9.1b

1.27

Interactions

E X F 0.08 .7822

E X B 0.96 .4509

F X B 2.15 .1021

EXFXB 0.00 .9840

(continued)

66

Table 5 (continued)


Independence

Race (E)

White 53 8.5 1.65

Black 25 8.2 0.86 0.94 .3977

Hispanic 5 7.8 1.52

Sex (F)

Male 24 7.8 1.820.62 .4349

Female 59 8.7 1.31


80 or below 16 7.3 1.63

81 to 90 24 8.3 1.371.12 .3472

91 to 100 26 8.7 1.61

101 to 120 17 9.1 1.25

Interactions

E X F 0.73 .:.063

E X B 1.16 .3406

F X B 0.85 .4738

E XFXB 5.14 .0268

(continued)

67

Table 5 (continued)


Orientation

Race (E)

White 53 6.1 2.25

Black 25 7.6 2.06 1.25 .2929

Hispanic 5 6.6 1.95

Sex (F)

Male 24 6.7 2.321.94 .1686

Female 59 6.5 2.26


80 or below 16 5.6g 2.58

81 to 90 24 6.6 1.813.80 .0142

91 to 100 26 7.0h

2.51

101 to 120 17 6.6 2.06

Interactions

E X F 3.95 .0511

E X B 0.10 .9926

F X B 2.11 .1075

EXFXB 1.34 .2511

(continued)

68

Table 5 (continued)


Compromise

Race (E)

White 53 5.0 1.45

Black 25 5.0 1.50 2.08 .1330

Hispanic 5 4.6 0.89

Sex (F)

Male 24 5.0 1.680.09 .7668

Female 59 5.0 1.33


80 or below 16 4.4 d 1.50

81 to 90 24 4.8 1.693.70 .0160

91 to 100 26 5.4e 1.14

101 to 120 17 5.2 1.24

Interactions

E X F 1.57 .2153

E X B 0.81 .5479

F X B 2.56 .0623

EXFXB 0.73 .3962

* The larger the value, the greater the career maturity.** Possible scores: Decisiveness (0-10), Involvement (0-10),Independence (0-10), Orientation (0-10), and Compromise (0-7).ab Difference statistically significant at the .05 level according toBonferroni (Dunn) t test for means.gh Difference statistically significant at the .05 level.de Difference statistically significant at the .05 level according toDuncan's multiple-range test for means.

69

Six of the 35 p values were statistically significant


comparisons were rejected. Four of the statistically

significant comparisons were for main effects. The

following main effects were statistically significant:

1. the independent variable sex for the dependent


2. the independent variable general intelligence for

the dependent variable Involvement,


the dependent variable Orientation, and


the dependent variable Compromise.

The results cited in Table 5 indicated the following for

main effects:

1. females had a statistically larger mean Involvement

score than males,

2. individuals with general intelligence of 91 and

greater had a statistically larger mean Involvement score

than those with 90 or below,

3. individuals with general intelligence of 91 to 100

had a statistically larger mean Orientation score than those

with 80 or below, and


had a statistically larger mea Compromise score than those

with 80 or below.

70

Two of the statistically significant comparisons were

for interactions. The following interactions were

statistically significant:

1. the independent variables race, sex, and general

intelligence for the dependent variable Independence, and

2. the independent variables race and sex for the


The interaction among the independent variables race,

sex, and general intelligence for the dependent variable

Independence was not depicted in a profile plot. The

interaction was not presented in a figure due to the sample

size and the nature of the data.

The interaction between the independent variables race

and sex for the dependent variable Orientation was depicted

in a profile plot. Figure 3 contains mean Orientation

scores and curves for sex.

Figure 3: The interaction between Independent Variables

Race and Sex for the Dependent Variable Orientation

SexMale=Female-

8.0

7.5

7.0

6.5

6.0

5.5

5.0

(22),-,...

// ,,/ \ ..../ \ \/ \ \// \ \/ ... \

', 3)

...

(34),

White

(3)

(2)

Black Hispanic

71

Race

The interaction between the independent variables race

and sex for the dependent variable Orientation was

disordinal. The results cited in Figure 3 indicated the

following:

1. Black females had numerically the largest mean

Orientation score of any subgroup,

2. Black males had numerically the smallest mean

Orientation score of any subgroup, and

3. Black females had numerically larger mean

Orientation scores than Black males; and White males had

numerically larger mean Orientation scores than White

females.

72

Discussion

Summary

The purpose of the researcher was to investigate ti,e

career maturity of welfare recipients. The following six



of control. Dependent variables were scores from the

following five scales of the Career Maturity Inventory -







way analysis of variance (general linear model).

A total of 100 comparisons were made plus 75 recurring.

Of the 100 comparisons made, 30 were for main effects and 70

for interactions. Of the 30 main effects, 6 were

statistically significant at the .05 level. The following

main effects were statistically significant:


dependent variable Decisiveness,


dependent variable Orientation,

3. the independent variable sex for the dependent


73


the dependent variable Involvement,


the dependent variable Orientation, and


the dependent variable Compromise.

The results indicated the following for main effects:


statistically larger mean Decisiveness score than those with

external locus of control,


statistically larger mean orientation score than those with

external locus of control,

3. females had a statistically larger mean Involvement

score than males,

4. individuals with general intelligence of 91 and

greater had a statistically larger mean Involvement score

than those with 90 and less,


had a statistically larger mean Orientation score than those

with 80 or below, and


had a statistically larger mean Compromise score than those

with 80 or below.

Of the 70 interactions, 5 were statistically

significant at the .05 level. The following interactions

8 4

74

were statistically significant:

1. the independent variables general intelligence and

locus of control for the dependent variable Involvement,

2. the independent variables formal education, general

intelligence, and locus of control for the dependent


3. the independent variables formal education and age

for the dependent variable Decisiveness,

4. the independent variables race, sex, and general

intelligence for the dependent variable Independence, and

5. the independent variables race and sex for the


Related Literature and the Results of the Present Study

Overall, the results of the studies reviewed indicated

an internal locus of control and a higher general

intelligence to be consistent predictors of career maturity

regardless of race, sex, age, and level of formal education.

In terms of race, sex, age, and level of formal education,

the results were less conclusive.

The results of the present study supported those

reported by Stebbing (1985), Khan and Alvi (1983), Lokan,

Boss, and Patsula (1982), Thomas and Carpenter (1976), and

Gable, Thompson, and Glanstein (1976). The results of these

studies indicated locus of control to be a valid predictor

of career maturity. The present researcher found a

statistically significant association between locus of

U)

75

control and the following three scales of the Career

Maturity Inventory - Attitude Scale Counseling Form B-1:

Decisiveness, Involvement, and Orientation.

Lawrence and Brown (1976) found a positive association

between intelligence and career maturity in their study of

9th, 10th, and 12th grade students. They also reported an

association among intelligence, race, sex, and career

maturity. The results of the present study supported those

of Lawrence and Brown. Subjects of the present study with a

higher general intelligence were found to also have a higher

career maturity on the following scales of the Career

Maturity Inventory - Attitude Scale Counseling Form B-1:

Involvement, Independence, Orientation, and Compromise.

The results of Lawrence and Brown (1976), McNair and

Brown (1983), and Lee (19b4) all indicated Whites as being

more career mature than Blacks. The results of the present

study failed to support the results of those studies

conclusively. The present researcher found Black females

had numerically the highest career maturity on the

Orientation Scale and Black males had numerically the lowest

career maturity. Also on the Orientation Scale, White males

were found to be numerically more career mature than White

females.

Lee (1984) and Herr and Enderlein (1976) reported

females as significantly more career mature than males.

However, Lawrence and Brown (1976) and McNair and Brown

76

(1983) did not report a significant difference between males

and females. The present researcher found that females were

significantly more career mature on the Involvement Scale of

the Career haturity Inventory - Attitude Scale Counseling

Form B 1 than males, thus, supporting the results of Lee,

and Herr and Enderlein.

Herr and Enderlein (1976) studied the career maturity

of 9th, 10th, and 12th grade students and reported that

career maturity increased with grade level, but not without

other influences such as school effects, curriculum choices,

and sex differences. Healy, O'Shea, and Crook (1985)

studied 18 to 30 year old college students and reported a

positive association between age and career maturity. That

is, career attitudes mature with age. The results of the

present study indicated individuals aged 18 to 24 with

formal education of more than a high school diploma had

numerically higher career maturity on the Decisiveness

Scale, thus, supporting the conclusions of Herr and

Enderlein, and Healy, O'Shea, and Crook for this age group.

The present researcher also found adults aged 32 to 48 with

formal education of more than a high school diploma had

numerically the lowest career maturity on the Decisiveness

Scale. Therefore, for this age group, the results of the

present study did not support the findings of Healy, O'Shea,

and Crook that career attitudes mature with age.

77

Generalizations


the following generalizations:


mature in Decisiveness,


mature in Orientation,

3. females are more mature in Involvement than males,


are more mature in Orientation,


are more mature in Compromise, and

6. significant interactions for

(a) the independent variables general intelligence

and locus of control for the dependent variable Involvement,

(b) the independent variables formal education,

general intelligence, and locus of control for the dependent


(c) the independent variables formal education and

age for the dependent variable Decisiveness,

(d) the independent variables race, sex, and

general intelligence for the dependent variable

Independence, and

(e) the independent variables race and sex for the


78

Recommendations


the following recommendations:

1. the study should be replicated with a large random

sample,

2. the study should be replicated in a variety of

geographical areas, and

3. the study should be replicated as longitudinal.

79

References

Amster, J. B., & Lazarus, P. J. (1982). Locus of control

of disadvantaged high school dropouts: Preliminary data.

Perceptual and Motor Skills, 55, 1332-1334.

Bartlett, W. E. (1968). Vocational maturity and

personality variables of manpower trainees. Vocational

Guidance Quarterly, 17, 104-108.

Chisman, F. P., & Woodworth, R. S. (1992). The promise of

JOBS: Policies, programs and possibilities. A Report on

an Investigation of Basic Skills Instruction in the Job

Opportunities and Basic Skills Traiaing Program (JOBS).

Washington, DC: The Southport Institute for Policy

Analysis.

Crites, J. 0. (1965). Measurement of vocational maturity

in adolescence: I. Attitude test of the Vocational

Development Inventory. Psychological Monographs: General

and Applied, 79 (2 Whole No. 595).

Crites, J. 0. (1978a). Career Maturity Inventory

Administration and Use Manual (2nd ed.). Monteray, CA:

CTB/McGraw-Hill.

Crites, J. O. (1978b). Career Maturity Inventory: Theory

and Research Handbook (2nd ed.). Monteray, CA:

CTB/McGraw-Hill.

Cull, J. G., & Hardy, R. E. (1973). The big welfare mess:

Public assistance and rehabilitation approaches.

Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.

80

Furstenberg, F. F., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Morgan, S. P.

(1987). Adolescent mothers in later life. Cambridge,

NY: Cambridge University Press.

Gable, R. K., Thompson, D. L., & Glanstein, P. J. (1976).

Perceptions of personal control and conformity of

vocational choice as correlates of vocational

development. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 8, 259-267.

Gladstone, L., & Trimmer, H. W. (1985). Factors predicting

success in training and employment for WIN clients in

southern Nevada. Journal of Employment Counseling, 22,

59-69.

Healy, C. C., O'Shea, D. 0., & Crook, R. H. (1985).

Relation of career attitudes to age and career progress

during college. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32,

239-244.

Herr, E. L., & Enderlein, T. E. (1976). Vocational

maturity: The effects of school, grade, curriculum and

sex. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 8, 227-238.

Holland, M. (1981). Relationships between vocational

development and self concept in sixth grade students.

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 18, 228-236.

Kansas Department of Human Resources. (December, 1993).

Labor market review. Topeka, KS: Division of Policy &

Management Analysis Labor Market Information Services.

Khan, S. B., & Alvi, S. A. (1983). Educational, social and

psychological correlates of vocational maturity. Journal

9

81

of Vocational Behavior, 22, 357-364.

Lawrence, W., & Brown, D. (1976). An investigation of

intelligence, self-concept, socioeconomic status, race,

and sex as predictors of career maturity. Journal of

Vocational Behavior, 9, 43-52.

Lee, C. C. (1984). Predicting the career choice attitudes

of rural Black, White, and Native American high school

students. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 32, 177-184.

Lovan, J. J., Boss, M. W., & Patsula, P. J. (1982). A

study of vocational maturity during adolescence and locus

of control. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 20, 331-342.

Luzzo, D. A. (1991). Social class and ethnic differences

in college students' career maturity: A quantitative

and qualitative analysis. A paper presented at the

Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research

Association, Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction

Service No. ED 333 152)

Manuele, C. A. (1983). The development of a measure to

assess vocational maturity in adults with delayed career

development. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 23, 45-63.

McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (1984). Research in

education: A conceptual introduction. Boston, MA:

Little, Brown and Company.

McNair, D., & Brown, D. (1983). Predicting the

occupational aspirations, occupational expectations, and

career maturity of Black and White male and female 10th

82

graders. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 32, 29-36.

Nightingale, D. S. (1989). Effects of increased emphasis

on education-related activities for welfare recipients.

Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. (ERIC Document

Reproduction Service No. ED 315 524)

Palm, A. J., & Lutz, J. G. (1983). The relationship of

performance on the CMI to intelligence with disadvantaged

youngsters. Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 16,

139-148.

Randolph, G. C., II, & McCarthy, K. V. (1991). ADC mothers

reach self sufficiency through comprehensive support and

family development services program. (ERIC Document

Reproduction Service No. ED 343 052)

Rodriguez, M., & Blocher, D. (1988). A comparison of two

approaches to enhancing career maturity in Puerto Rican

college women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35,

275-280.

Rolle, G. F., Sr. (1977). Facilitating career development

of minority students. Atlanta, GA: Southern Association

of Colleges and Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction No.

Ed 189 280)

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for

internal versus external control of reinforcement.

Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80,

Whole No. 609, p. 1-28.

Sklar, M. H. (1987). Welfare-to-work: Options through job

n3

83

training. Employment and training issues. (ERIC

Document Reproductive Service No. ED 282 039)

Stebbing, M. C. (1985). Human potential: A study of locus

of control, sex, role orientation, and career maturity.

A paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American

Educational Research Association, 69th, Chicago, IL.

(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 257 953)

Super, D. E. (1955). Dimensions and measurement of

vocational maturity. Teachers College Record, 57,

151-163.

Super, D. E., Crites, J. O., Hummel, R. C., Moser, H. P.,

Overstreet, P. C., & Warnath, C. F. (1957). Vocational

development: A framework for research. New York:

Teachers College, Columbia University.

Super, D. E., and Kidd, K. M. (1979). Vocational maturity

in adulthood: Toward turning a model into a measure.

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 255-270.

Super, D. E., & Overstreet, P. L. (1960). The vocational

maturity of ninth grade boys. New York: Teachers

College Press.

Thomas, H. B., & Carpenter, J. A. (1976). A developmental

study of the mediating effects of locus of control on

career maturity. A paper presented at the Annual Meeting

of the National Council on Measurement in Education,

San Francisco, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service

No. Ed 134 593)

74

84

U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training

Administration, U.S. Employment Service. (1983). Manual

for the USES General Aptitude Test Battery. Section I:

Administration and Scoring (Forms C and D). Salt Lake

City, UT: Utah Department of Employment Security.

U.S. Department of Labor, Manpower Administration. (1979).

Manual for the USES General Aptitude Test Battery.

Section III: Development. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office.

West, D. K. (1988). Comparisons of career maturity and its

relationship with academic performance. Journal of

American Indian Education, 27, 1-7.

85

Appendix A


and Total Score for the I-E Scale

86


and Total Score for the I-E Scale*

Item

Number

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

Biserial Correlation

Coefficient

(filler)

.260

. 182

.289

. 179

.319

.229

(filler)

. 164

.238

.301

.265

.271

(filler)

.288

.307

. 357

.310

(filler)

.271

21.

22.

23.

.152

.227

.255

24. (filler)

25. .480

26. .195

27. (filler)

28. .238

29. .109

* N=400, 200 males, 200 females

713

87

88

Appendix B

Permission to Utilize Data Generated

from Pre-Orientation Vocational Assessment

Sessions Conducted with Welfare Recipients

Who were Eligible for the JOBS Program

89

February 14, 1994

Phyllis Lewin, DirectorEmployment Preparation ServicesWest Hall, 2nd Floor300 SW OakleyTopeka, KS 6E606

Dear Ms. Lewin:

I am a vocational counselor with the DHR KanWork program inSedgwick County. I am working toward the completion of aMaster of Science degree in Counseling from Fort Hays StateUniversity. A thesis is required for completion of thisprogram. The topic I have chosen is the career maturity ofwelfare recipients.

My plan is to investigate race, sex, age, level of formaleducation, general intelligence (measured by the GeneralAptitude Test Battery), locus of control (measured byRotter's I-E Scale), and career maturity (measured by theCareer Maturity Inventory) of welfare recipients.

Recently I spoke with Linda Sorrell, Director of the SRSKanWork program in Sedgwick County, and gained her supportfor my research project. She has agreed to allow me toconduct pre-orientation vocational assessment sessions whichwould include the testing instruments mentioned above.

All new KanWork clients subject to initial contact in March,1994, will be scheduled for pre-orientation vocationalassessments (group sessions lasting approximately 4 hours).This is not a current practice in Sedgwick County, but hasbeen a long-time goal and will be viewed as a pilot project.In addition, the pre-crientation vocational assessments mayspeed up each client's career choice process. Ifsuccessful, consideration will be given to adopting thisprocedure to the intake process in Sedgwick County accordingto Ms. Sorrell.

Please consider this request to use data from theseassessments for my research thesis. No clients will beidentified by name, and all information will be treated as

90

group data. In addition, a profile will be completed oneach client which will be given to the SRS KanWorkcasemanagers to be used as part of their assessment.

Your immediate reply would be greatly appreciated. Pleasemark the appropriate response below:

Permission is hereby granted to Ms. Carol Beckman touse data collected during the pre-orientationvocational assessment sessions conducted with welfarerecipients in the KanWork program.

Permission is denied.

Please return this request to me in the enclosed envelope assoon as possible. If you have questions, please feel freeto contact me during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at(316) 266-8611.

Sincerely,

Carol BeckmanKanWork Vocational CounselorDepartment of Human Resources

91

Appendix C

Sample Letter to Subjects

r

92

Dear KanWork Client:

You are about to enter the KanWork program. Before you do,however, you are required to attend a pre-orientationvocational assessment.

This assessment will take approximately four (4) hours. Theresults of your assessment will help you and your KanWorkcasemanager decide upon your plan of action.

It is critical that you attend this assessment. Pleasereport to the Job Service Center, 402 East 2nd Street (2nd &Topeka) at 9:00 a.m. on Monday, March 14, 1994.

Please do not bring children as there are no accommodationsfor their care. If you need assistance with child care ortransportation, please contact the person listed below.

We look forward to seeing you!

93

Appendix D

Verbal Instructions

for Test Administration

94

Verbal Instructions for Test Administration

1. SAY: Thank you for coming to the pre-orientation

vocational assessment. The assessment you complete today

will provide information regarding your academic strengths

and abilities and career decision making skills.

Instructions will be provided to you for each assessment, so

please listen carefully.

2. SAY: The first assessment you will be taking is called

the General Aptitude Test Battery. This assessment will

provide information regarding your academic skills and

abilities, and give an indication of the types of jobs

and/or training you would be able to do easily. It is a

standardized test and because of that, the instructions will

be read verbatim from the manual.

3. The researcher used instructions for the administration

of the GATB - Form D from the Manual for the USES General

Aptitude Test Battery Section I: Administration and Scoring

(U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training

Administration, U.S. Employment Service, 1983).

4. The subjects were allowed a 10 minute break after all

of them had finished the GATB. Once all subjects had

returned and were settled, the researcher continued.

5. SAY: Now you will complete the second of the three

assessments This one is not timed. Please write your name

and today's date at the top of the assessment form.

95

6. HAND OUT THE I-E SCALE.


of the I-E Scale taken from Rotter [(1966) Appendix E].

8. After all subjects had finished the I-E Scale, the

copies were collected.

9. SAY: The last assessment is also not timed. When you

finish, please hand it to me and then you may go. The

results of your assessment will be given to your KanWork

casemanager.

10. HAND OUT THE CAREER MATURITY INVENTORY - ATTITUDE SCALE

COUNSELING FORM B-1.


of the Attitude Scale of the Career Maturity Inventory from

the Administration and Use Manual by Crites (1978a).

12. Participants were thanked individually as they handed

in the last .--..essment.

Instruments were handed out in the following order:

1. General Aptitude Test Battery;

2. I-E Scale; and

3. Career Maturity Inventory - Attitude Scale.

Additional items needed for the administration of the

instrument included the following:

1. No. 2 pencils;

2. scratch paper; and

3. a stopwatch.

I (;

96

Appendix E

Instructions for the I-E Scale

97

Instructions for the I-E Scale*

SAY: This is a questionnaire to find out the way in which

certain important events in our society affect different

people. Each item consists of a pair of alternatives

lettered a or b. Please select the one statement of each

pair (and only one) which you more strongly believe to be

the case as far as you're concerned. Be sure to select the

one you actually believe to be more true rather than the one

you think you should choose or the one you would like to be

true. This is a measure of personal belief: obviously

there are no right or wrong answers. ...Please answer these

items carefully but do not spend too much time on any one

item. Be sure to find an answer for every choice. Circle

either a or b on each question for the statement you believe

to be more true. In some instances you may discover that

you believe both statements or neither one. In such cases,

be sure to select the one you more strongly believe to be

the case as far as you're concerned. Also try to respond to

each item independently when making your choice; do not be

influenced by your previous choices.

* Adapted from, Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized

expectancies for internal versus external control of

reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and

Applied, 80, (1 Whole No. 609)

103

document resume ed 373 290 cg 025 605 author beckman

Documents